Polaris Refresh (RX 500 Series) Rumors

[w3rd]

I'm not going to trust a company to give it to me straight. If they wanted to dispel all notion of whether or not they were being truthful, they'd demonstrate a benchmark. Otherwise, I'm going to assume that they want to sell me a product. There's nothing wrong with that. Apple CEO and engineers talk about how great their product is, Google CEO and engineers talk about how great their product is, Microsoft CEO and engineers talk about how great their product is. No one talks about the awful turd they're making, and really only acknowledge such if it's so bad that no amount of company Kool-aid can bend reality.

Spare me, please. Provide links to this "current knowledge" you have. If you think anyone behaving rationally and thinking critically is trolling this place must seem like a very large bridge to you.

Seriously, provide links to such evidence. All of the linked rumors so far suggest that my assumptions are reasonable.

Please find where I've said it's going to be nothing but doom and gloom or the worst case. Pointing out that such a case exists, doesn't mean I believe it to be likely. As I said before, it's about as unlikely as a best case scenario, but you seem to read what you want to read and ignore anything else. Then you accuse me and others of making comical predictions when your own posts seem to claim that the 580 will have amazing performance, good OC headroom, at low power, while AMD sells them at a discounted price. I'd swear that this has to be deliberate as I can't imagine how someone could honestly think this way.

Really..?

We get it dude, you have Trust issues... and you don't believe anything, unless people provide "something" to you. Nobody knows what pieces you are missing, or don't get..?

Basically, you give us more of what I already suggested, by responding with more proof of you insecurities..?. You've admitted that you are unable to accept things, and that you are being purposely obtuse. Unable to even rebuttal your own points, or refute others, but still asking for proof of what others suggest. Seems you are in the learning stages of your development. Try jumping threw you own hopes and proving us with data (slides) that supports your claims.

Please explain technically, why AMD can't do such things. Can't release such a product..

Tell us why the 580 costs more... or how the newer wafers have bad yields, or bad lithography... and run hotter and use more energy and why AMD is going backwards and incapable of moving forward with their technology. This Community is waiting to be educated by you insight.

I don't have to give a reason as to why the 580 MIGHT be cheaper, or run cooler, or use less wattage.... because that is the NROM in the industry, as chip companies refine their lithography spins.



Coincidentally, YOU do not react/respond with such skepticism (untrusting nature) in Intel threads. Only in AMD threads. So I think Your own posts, speak for themselves bro.


Insults are not allowed.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

 

[Mopetar]

I don't even know why I should bother replying to you, but you're the one making baseless claims and acting as though its somehow the truth. You can't even link to a particular source (credible or not) to any of these rumors. I'm pretty sure you just make it all up as you go along: http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=threads/vega-navi-rumors.2486940/page-65#post-38808927

Try jumping threw you own hopes and proving us with data (slides) that supports your claims.

I haven't made any claims (other than it's incredibly foolish to assume that the highly unlikely outcomes is the true case without substantial evidence) whereas this thread is littered with unsubstantiated claims that you've made. I don't see you posting any data or slides that support your claims:

Polaris re-spin is aimed at the $99 ~ $199 market. Faster, cooler & more efficient than current models.

The Radeon 580, will be a respin of the 480, but use less power and have more performance at lower price. Not hard to figure out that AMD's future is Vega, and this Polaris respin is just a mature process for their low-end chips & mainstream market.

Tell us why the 580 costs more...

It performs better for one, so it can cost more. Someone else in this thread also at least posted a link to a rumor suggesting it would cost more as well: http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=thread...00-series-rumors.2502232/page-3#post-38828484

or how the newer wafers have bad yields

I don't believe I've said anything to this effect in this thread.

or bad lithography

Or this either.

... and run hotter and use more energy

I'm pretty sure they can use more energy simply because they have an 8-pin power connector instead of a 6-pin. Whether or not they can physically use all of the available power remains to be seen. They are also clocked higher than the 480 which suggests three possible outcomes: less power for more clock, same power for more clock, or more power for more clock. With no other evidence, the first is less likely than the other two, especially given the inclusion of an 8-pin power connector. They're not just going to include that for no reason at all. It's just basic logical reasoning to assume that it will use more power, especially when it can OC to at least 1500 MHz.

and why AMD is going backwards and incapable of moving forward with their technology.

I don't recall saying that either. What I've said is that it's unlikely that your assumption of a faster, cooler, cheaper 580 is pretty unlikely. Two of the three on their own might be possible, but all three together is just highly unlikely and there's no good reason to believe that to be the case without really good evidence just as there's no good reason to believe that none of them are true. When you have a large number of probabilistic factors to which you can assign labels of desirable and undesirable, you tend to get a mix of both in most cases rather than seeing all or none.

Coincidentally, YOU do not react/respond with such skepticism (untrusting nature) in Intel threads. Only in AMD threads. So I think Your own posts, speak for themselves bro.

Now I'm quite certain you're just making this up as you go along as I rarely post in Intel threads these days. I had to go back about a month before finding a post in an Intel thread and it wasn't even one related to current products. If I respond with skepticism, it's only to things that are ridiculous and completely lacking a shred of support.

 

[w3rd]

Correct, You didn't say any of that^.

I was illustrating what your words imply. And how you obtusely speak down about AMD technology, by speculating AMD just can't do the things people are suggesting. Sadly, because nobody has proven to you, that AMD can do things other companies do.

You have to at least consider leaked slides. Their specs don't have to be true, for you to grasp at the technology they are using. I called you out for being purposely obtuse.

"...but all three (cheaper, cooler, less wattage) together is just highly unlikely and there's no good reason to believe that to be the case without really good evidence just as there's no good reason to believe that none of them are true." -

But there is evidence, but to you it's just not good enough for you to include in your opinion.



And why can't AMD as a company do this..? (Polaris10 < Polaris20)
Typically, when using refined/matured lithography and releasing a new spun'd chip, it has better yields from the wafer, offer better chip efficiency (thus thermals), and better clocks...

That is what a maturing process offers.



Again, insults are not allowed. Speak to the topics without insults or don't post.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

 

[Bacon1]

https://videocardz.com/68099/exclusive-gigabyte-radeon-rx-500-series-unveiled

 

[piesquared]

https://videocardz.com/68099/exclusive-gigabyte-radeon-rx-500-series-unveiled

Well board partners seem to think it's worthwhile putting effort into making cards based on these chips, contrary to most people posting here.

 

[FFFF]

Well board partners seem to think it's worthwhile putting effort into making cards based on these chips, contrary to most people posting here.

Well of course, board partners always delight on the idea of selling the same card for more money.

 

[piesquared]

That doesn't seem to jive though, as from what i've been reading people won't even buy the same card for less money.

 

[railven]

That doesn't seem to jive though, as from what i've been reading people won't even buy the same card for less money.

When using such a broad term like "people" you're both right!

 

[piesquared]

Hmmm Rome wasn't built in a day mean anything?? G---o from O--K is in Rome as is AMD and claims to be "very impressed" by what he is seeing.*

*I really didn't want to re post that, but it is the internet afterall!

*Don't even know if it belongs in Vega thread or RX 580 thread.

*What are the potential boost clocks of RX 580?

AMD have got the leaks locked down!

 

[96Firebird]

Of course AIB partners are eager to rebrand, they get to sell a "new" product that isn't actually new...

Looks like AMD learned from their previous mis-steps, they should have rebranded Hawaii long before they actually did.

 

[piesquared]

Again that would make little sense if everyone is claiming they wont buy it (yet curiously dont have any issue with NV rebrands).

 

[PhonakV30]

It's confirmed.RX 580 is Polaris 20.So this SS Is not(probably) fake

Only thing : default clock ( 1450Mhz).

 

[Mopetar]

Correct, You didn't say any of that^.

Then why write any of what you wrote in response?

I was illustrating what your words imply.

No, you're illustrating what you inferred, which I've pointed out multiple times is completely off the mark. You keep erecting a straw-man and then slinging insults at it.

You have to at least consider leaked slides. Their specs don't have to be true, for you to grasp at the technology they are using. I called you out for being purposely obtuse.

Which slides? You've been asked multiple times (and not just by me) to provide a source for any of what you're saying but you never do. Meanwhile, plenty of other posters have provided sources to suggest your assumptions are wrong.

"...but all three (cheaper, cooler, less wattage) together is just highly unlikely and there's no good reason to believe that to be the case without really good evidence just as there's no good reason to believe that none of them are true." -

But there is evidence, but to you it's just not good enough for you to include in your opinion.

How can I tell you whether I think the evidence is any good or not if you don't even link to it. Meanwhile, there's at least some evidence (Yes, it's possible it can be a fabrication, but you just consider that when weighing probabilities of an outcome) that points the 500 series chips being more expensive. If new rumors become available, I'll adjust my predictions accordingly. The evidence suggests that you're the own source for your ideas of what the 500-series refresh will be. I don't consider that even remotely good evidence and still have no good reason to believe your claims.

You still could turn out to be completely correct just by complete chance. If I go to the racetracks and claim and genie has imbued me with psychic powers that allow me to predict the winner, no one there has any good reason to believe me, yet I can still predict a winner by complete chance, but it doesn't do me any good for future races, and still no one would have any good reason to believe me.

 

[Mopetar]

It's confirmed.RX 580 is Polaris 20.So this SS Is not(probably) fake

Another site got a hold of early driver files which list Polaris 20 as well: https://videocardz.com/68212/amd-polaris-20-confirmed

Seems like it isn't just a simple rebranding after all.

 

[IEC]

Worth noting is the revision in that SS is listed as E7. My RX 480s are all revision C7.

 

[crisium]

I'll believe 1450MHz stock when I see it.

Re: Polaris 20 name. Also remember that AMD renamed 7000 and 200 series architectures when they rebranded them. Hawaii was renamed Grenada, but we all ignore that rename because their was no true architectural change. Same with Tonga to Antigua, and Pitcairn to Curaçao.

 

[96Firebird]

Again that would make little sense if everyone is claiming they wont buy it (yet curiously dont have any issue with NV rebrands).

How have you not learned that people who post on forums tend to not have the same buying habits as the general public? Rebrands to us are new products to those who don't know any better.

Seems like it isn't just a simple rebranding after all.

Kinda like how Grenada wasn't a rebrand of Hawaii...

 

[jpiniero]

Yeah, AMD did do a respin and faster memory with Grenada. It sounds like the faster memory isn't happening with the 500 series though.

 

[CatMerc]

It's confirmed.RX 580 is Polaris 20.So this SS Is not(probably) fake

Only thing : default clock ( 1450Mhz).

That wasn't the only problem.
From reddit:

I call bullshit. The "internal name" shouldn't be Polaris 20 when it's typically something like "Ellesmere". But there are a bunch of other weird things here...

Here's what my GPU-Z looks like. Notice how "AMD Crossfire" is called "AMD" here, and "Release Date" turned into "Release". Why is it called Microsoft Basic Display Adapter, but still giving us info about the GPU? How could it be operating at PCIe x16 3.0 if it's on CPU rendering (that last part lowers to 1.1 when your graphics card is less active... and this one is nearly totally inactive. Didn't want to show that because it'd also expose my device id). What's with the fucked up driver number?

Something seems terribly off about all of this.

I'll believe 1450MHz stock when I see it.

Re: Polaris 20 name. Also remember that AMD renamed 7000 and 200 series architectures when they rebranded them. Hawaii was renamed Grenada, but we all ignore that rename because their was no true architectural change. Same with Tonga to Antigua, and Pitcairn to Curaçao.

Well, Grenada did clock on average 5%-10% higher than Hawaii. It also had better power management, though it was not apparent because the clockspeed increase increased power consumption, as well as the faster memory.

 

[Mopetar]

Kinda like how Grenada wasn't a rebrand of Hawaii...

I said a "simple rebranding" as I had assumed it was just going to be the same Polaris 10 chip but with a better bin. All information still points to the same overall design (36 CU, etc.), but there's probably a few tweaks. I don't believe that Polaris 20 is somehow a magic fix that's going to bring massive IPC improvements, etc. but it probably will allow AMD to hit higher clock speeds.

I still don't think its worthy of a move to 500 as this is basically what AMD might have previously released as a *80X card (without additional shaders though). Maybe there's a lot of OC headroom we don't know about yet from the change to an 8-pin connector, and if most chips could get up to around 1600 MHz it would definitely be a considerable upgrade and worthy of a new number, but that's all just speculation still.

As I pointed out before, I don't think most people would care if it was still Polaris 10 if the 480 became the 570 and everything else shifted similarly. That kind of rebranding happens all the time for both companies and people don't really care as long as it moves down the product stack. Occasionally there's some really shameful examples (e.g. the 730 that was an old GK108 430) but for the most part you don't see that happening or it tends to be for OEM parts.

 

[piesquared]

Here's the screenshot from that link. So no doesn't look like a 'rebrand' after all, like the 1060 is, but pretty likely has had a respin or more. Really curious about the boost clock on the RX 500 series.

 

[Mopetar]

Here's the screenshot from that link. So no doesn't look like a 'rebrand' after all, like the 1060 is. Really curious about the boost clock on the RX 500 series.

How is the 1060 a rebrand when they're still calling it the 1060? It's just like the *80X and *90X cards that AMD put out in the previous generations. I think AMD should have done the same and just called this thing a 480X. Since they're going to sell Vega as Vega, they could just use that as the opportunity to roll out a new naming scheme and eventually replace Polaris with a smaller Vega die.

 

[piesquared]

How is the 1060 a rebrand when they're still calling it the 1060? It's just like the *80X and *90X cards that AMD put out in the previous generations. I think AMD should have done the same and just called this thing a 480X. Since they're going to sell Vega as Vega, they could just use that as the opportunity to roll out a new naming scheme and eventually replace Polaris with a smaller Vega die.

Selling a different card under with the same name is still a rebrand (although they'll likely tack a "ti" to the end of it anyway). It's just NV playing consumer tricks like they've done time and time again over the years (like branding a 1060 3GB as a full 1060). AMD doesn't need to follow NV's confusing and deceptive marketing trickery. A newly spun chip with higher performance obviously should have an updated brand.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Selling a different card under with the same name is still a rebrand (although they'll likely tack a "ti" to the end of it anyway). It's just NV playing consumer tricks like they've done time and time again over the years (like branding a 1060 3GB as a full 1060). AMD doesn't need to follow NV's confusing and deceptive marketing trickery. A newly spun chip with higher performance obviously should have an updated brand.

Nope, AMD has plenty of their own, especially when it comes to rebranding gpus. And actually, as far as the 1060 goes, something with the same name cannot, by definition, be a "rebrand". In fact it is quite the opposite. Giving better performance with the same "brand" while rebrands (both nVidia and AMD do it) are just the opposite, basically similar performance under a new name that implies a new product.

Actually, that is how AMD dropped to a historically low market share: offering rebrand after rebrand while nVidia was offering new, improved, more efficient products.

 

[Mopetar]

Selling a different card under with the same name is still a rebrand (although they'll likely tack a "ti" to the end of it anyway). It's just NV playing consumer tricks like they've done time and time again over the years (like branding a 1060 3GB as a full 1060). AMD doesn't need to follow NV's confusing and deceptive marketing trickery. A newly spun chip with higher performance obviously should have an updated brand.

If it were a different and worse card you'd have a point, but if all they've done is make improvements who cares assuming they don't also raise the price. Obviously they'd want some way to distinguish the different cards (such as adding Ti, X, or something else) to avoid confusion. I think calling it a 1060 Ti would just cheapen the Ti branding, but that's NVidia's prerogative.

We already know that the process at GF is improving because people with newer 480's are able to hit higher overclock speeds than at launch. At that point it becomes really difficult to distinguish what the Polaris 20 respin is responsible for and what's just the result of a maturing process. If we end up with a 580 that's got a lot of OC headroom, I think people will be far more forgiving than if its another repeat of the Polaris launch.